Seems to me to be if they can determine who collided into who
No they can't determine who collided into who.
It's simple:
Collision detected on your screen: You take damage, actual amount can vary
Collision detected on your enemy's screen: He takes damage, actual amount can vary.
For the rest of the story, please see the plethora of collision threads on this BBS.
When I said i really do try to get out of the way, i was referring mostly to guys who pull up and stir their sticks up right in front of you thinking somehow that will save them.... and it seems to work.
As you know, most of these types of threads spawn here during one school break or another.
When I said i really do try to get out of the way, i was referring mostly to guys who pull up and stir their sticks up right in front of you thinking somehow that will save them.... and it seems to work.
Who should die in a collision and how is it determined?:) :furious :)
If one guy gets a collided with mesg. the other gets a you collided mesg. Just seems the guy with the you have collided with mesg should lose in the collision or as in real life both should take heavy damage. That way collisions would be something to try and avoid instead of the take a gamble type mentality I've seen lately.
Yeah, I've seen vids from both sides of a collision where theres at least a 100' difference between the two- like a solid nose-to-nose hit on one end and an easy miss on the other. net lag and comp speed has a lot to do with who sees what- one guy can think he got deliberately rammed while the other can think he missed by a mile.
The solution is really simple. I have suggested it before. HiTech has shot it down before.
If BOTH FE's agree it's a collision BOTH take damage.
If BOTH FE's DON'T agree it was a collision NEITHER take damage...
Under no circumstances...ever...should just one person take damage from a collision
Most of my collisions are "one-sided".. so with your solution I will be able to fly guns blazing through every enemy buff, never having to worry about a collision and getting guaranteed kills on each attack :)
That is precisely why Kesmai gave collisions a good, long, hard look and decided the variablity of global internet connection fidelity made them impractical for implimentation in such a fast paced real-time environment. Far better for you to warp thru someone, both unscathed, than for you to warp through someone, they take damage and you fly on unscathed.
No one gets pissed if they think it was a collision and don't take damage themselves. People get pissed when it was a collision and the other dumb bastard who warped giggles and flies off unscathed while your useless husk that was once the proud receptacle of your pelt pouch full of scalps floats lazily to the ground, broken and fluttering like a fall leaf.
We're talking the lesser of evils here. If we must have collissions make them by consensus and unilateral.
Your way is by far the bigger evil. See my edit above ;)
Not all collisions happen with that extreme amount of lag but I (http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:wRGw_JZuO8_dTM:http://www.adda-sr.org/giffile/surrender.gif) under the multitudinous amount of posts on the subject.
Who should die in a collision?
Here's a question for anyone in the know. In a collision between American or European Steel vs. Japanese Rice paper, How in the world does a Japanese plane survive?
That is precisely why Kesmai gave collisions a good, long, hard look and decided the variablity of global internet connection fidelity made them impractical for implimentation in such a fast paced real-time environment. Far better for you to warp thru someone, both unscathed, than for you to warp through someone, they take damage and you fly on unscathed.You keep griping about warping, when 95%+ of the collisions that occur in this game have absolutely nothing to do with warping.
...<> has collided with you, usually you take no damage, but sometimes will take minimal damage.
That is precisely why Kesmai gave collisions a good, long, hard look and decided the variablity of global internet connection fidelity made them impractical for implimentation in such a fast paced real-time environment. Far better for you to warp thru someone, both unscathed, than for you to warp through someone, they take damage and you fly on unscathed.
No one gets pissed if they think it was a collision and don't take damage themselves. People get pissed when it was a collision and the other dumb bastard who warped giggles and flies off unscathed while your useless husk that was once the proud receptacle of your pelt pouch full of scalps floats lazily to the ground, broken and fluttering like a fall leaf.
We're talking the lesser of evils here. If we must have collissions make them by consensus and unilateral.
Give that man a cigar. :aok
The system as it stands is the best solution. If you don't want to suffer collision damage, then maintain a safe distance from the other aircraft. It could not be simpler.
Being an european player with a comparatively high ping, I suddenly have a genuine advantage - I know I have high latency, I know then I will survive most "collisions" because of that high total lag, it's very improbable a collision egisters on both FE's. An American player with a low ping would be at a disadvantage, cause if his enemy is another low-ping user too, the danger of registering a collision on both FE's is much higher. Result: Not only connection stability plays a role - suddenly ping time does matter tremendously. Players with high ping times (yet stable conections) will have a notably higher chance of getting away with suicidal attack tactics.
The current collision model is a very clever and elegant compromise for the internet related lag problem. Every other proposed "solution" is actually much worse for gameplay.
And how well did that decision work out for Kesmai?
.
.
.
.
Seems to me they no longer exist.
Pleaaaasse read about the subject first... It has been explained in lenght why "both should get damage" will result in exact the opposite what you are looking for.
If both get damage, ramming would suddenly really work, and would be almost impossible to dodge for the one being rammed.
Because on your front end you are in a different point in space. You would die to a collision with an ac 100' away. Do you want that?
How would that be any differant than them getting guns on and shooting someone down..... If they are that bloody good to get that close to ram there going to shoot the other guy down anyways. If they want to take their plane down let them.
Back in Warbirds I wrote a script that randomly turned collisions on and off (its an arena setting) with collisions being off 90% of the time. This ran in the Main Arena over there for over a year and no one ever noticed and complaints about collision code reduced dramatically.Sure turn it off.. Now I'll be able to drive through buffs guns ablaze. Taking no damage from running into em. :rolleyes:
Personally, I think collisions in online games are impossible to implement with any sort of fairness or realism and should be off completely. Random collisions on or off is a good compromise between managing the behavior induced by no collisions and the vagaries of collision coding.
And how well did that decision work out for Kesmai?
.
.
.
.
Seems to me they no longer exist.
Tools from my experience...if it says:
You have collided, usually you take 100% damage, opponent takes none or minimal.
<> has collided with you, usually you take no damage, but sometimes will take minimal damage.
Or if both messages come up, both players are going to receive significant damage.
As for how the system decides who crashed into who, well, that's already been explained and is variable at times.
i think the shortcomming can be in each persons machine too.You missed the message and the "You have collided." doesn't show in film.
in a collision i had with a zeek, i got the white ""XXX has collided with you" i look back, see him going down trailing smoke...as i almost enter a spin. i get control, and get shot down attempting to rtb.
watched the film....although i never got the orange""you have collided"" message, my film clearly showed the collision. so, although i only got the white message, both of our machines saw it, thus we both suffered. he wasn't shooting either, nor was i.
Yep, you run into the back of someone...YOU get a collision message and take damage. They can fly away and never even know you were there. Think of it as rear-ending another driver on the city streets...who is gonna get the ticket?
You missed the message and the "You have collided." doesn't show in film.
i saw the white one....wouldn't the orange one have been right with it?You still missed it.
I know AH tries to simulate realistic combat but in real life collisions don't both aircraft usually go down? Maybe a rare occurrence with a fighter and Bomber like the ramming campaign of the Luftwaffe.
I know AH tries to simulate realistic combat but in real life collisions don't both aircraft usually go down? Maybe a rare occurrence with a fighter and Bomber like the ramming campaign of the Luftwaffe.
I know AH tries to simulate realistic combat but in real life collisions don't both aircraft usually go down? Maybe a rare occurrence with a fighter and Bomber like the ramming campaign of the Luftwaffe.
And how well did that decision work out for Kesmai?
.
.
.
.
Seems to me they no longer exist.
Sure turn it off.. Now I'll be able to drive through buffs guns ablaze. Taking no damage from running into em. :rolleyes:
I could be that way right now and you wouldn't even know it. I suspect it may be. If it is that way I'd like the percentage off to be higher:)
Not all collisions happen with that extreme amount of lag but I (http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:wRGw_JZuO8_dTM:http://www.adda-sr.org/giffile/surrender.gif) under the multitudinous amount of posts on the subject.That lag was not extreme. In fact it was quite moderate.
I know AH tries to simulate realistic combat but in real life collisions don't both aircraft usually go down?Check out at about 5:40 . . .
The collision model is not there to simulate real life. It is there to prevent opponents from flying through each others planes with guns blazing.Most of the time collisions are head on. Also I've had the message X has collided with you and I'm toast and his (Usually a Spit) plane flies off into the sunset. A solution to stop collisions would be for both aircraft to be disabled thus causing pilots to avoid headon attacks. I can understand glancing hits but some use the head on tactic too much. :mad:
Not me, that's who! :)Thats the problem, you are "Not me" to everybody but you.
The system as it stands is the best solution. If you don't want to suffer collision damage, then maintain a safe distance from the other aircraft. It could not be simpler.
Most of the time collisions are head on. Also I've had the message X has collided with you and I'm toast and his (Usually a Spit) plane flies off into the sunset. A solution to stop collisions would be for both aircraft to be disabled thus causing pilots to avoid headon attacks. I can understand glancing hits but some use the head on tactic too much. :mad:
Most of the time collisions are head on. Also I've had the message X has collided with you and I'm toast and his (Usually a Spit) plane flies off into the sunset. A solution to stop collisions would be for both aircraft to be disabled thus causing pilots to avoid headon attacks. I can understand glancing hits but some use the head on tactic too much. :mad:
I have a much much better way for stop collisions.
DO NOT FLY INTO THE OTHER PLANE.
HiTech
What about if a collision message appears, no matter who is at fault, both planes die. That is simple and easy, and should reduce Hoing too.
I have a much much better way for stop collisions.
DO NOT FLY INTO THE OTHER PLANE.
HiTech
From my experience this comment is...dead on. I've never had a problem with the collision model. Whenever there is a collision, I always felt that even if it was his fault, it was still mine too for not anticipating it. Playing from the midwest though, I have a very good connection so it functions correctly for me. Europe might be a whole other story. Lusche, I hope you don't get rammed consistently like your screen cap shows, that would be very frustrating and I could definitely see why some would question the model even if it's entirely a latency issue.
What about if a collision message appears, no matter who is at fault, both planes die. That is simple and easy, and should reduce Hoing too.
What about if a collision message appears, no matter who is at fault, both planes die. That is simple and easy, and should reduce Hoing too.
Yeah, I am sure everybody would be thrilled to die in a collision with a plane 100-300' away.
That sure does makes a whole lot more sense than only taking damage if you actually hit them like we have now.
Do you even think before you post?
Yeah, I am sure everybody would be thrilled to die in a collision with a plane 100-300' away.
That sure does makes a whole lot more sense than only taking damage if you actually hit them like we have now.
Do you even think before you post?
If 2 planes collide, then they both should die. Why should one plane get the benefit over another because of connection issues (which no one has control over). I've never collided with someone 100'-300' away. Both planes die is simple and straight forward.
Do you ever think before you post?
The good thing in current collision modeling, my ping doesn't matter at all. What I see is what I get, just like any other player.
BTW, the one doing the ram (and getting all the damage) was me ;)
I've never collided with someone 100'-300' away.
Of course not. Because that would only happen if we implement the "BOTH GO DOWN" :):rofl :aok
Of course not. Because that would only happen if we implement the "BOTH GO DOWN" :)
Why is it that whenever it is the other person's fault for the collision, I die? I hardly ever win collisions. What do I need to do to win?
Don't collide?
Why is it that whenever it is the other person's fault for the collision, I die? I hardly ever win collisions. What do I need to do to win?YOU NEED TO NOT HIT THE OTHER AIRCRAFT ON YOUR COMPUTER. THEN YOU CAN'T/WON'T DIE FROM A COLLISION THAT HAPPENED ON YOUR COMPUTER. WHAT YOU SEE IS WHAT YOU GET SEE AND AVOID. NO CONTACT ON YOUR MACHINE, NO COLLISION FOR YOU.
If 2 planes collide, then they both should die. Why should one plane get the benefit over another because of connection issues (which no one has control over). I've never collided with someone 100'-300' away. Both planes die is simple and straight forward.
Do you ever think before you post?
True....However, I found through a little research that if you strike the other plane with your tail first, then you usually win. Does that ring true for anyone else?
4 planes in a 1 on 1.
Look at the pics provided. 2 planes in one picture colliding (that players FE) and 2 planes in the other 100' apart (that players FE).
Just because 2 of 'em collided doesn't mean the other 2 did as well.
(and i'm not the one failing to "get it" so I get to play the high and mighty "Think before you post" card kiddo)
Why is it that whenever it is the other person's fault for the collision, I die? I hardly ever win collisions. What do I need to do to win?
Yes. If I'm scissoring or braking or whatever....I'm slowing down. The guy behind me crashes into my tail. Odds are, he's going to incur more damage than me. He will hit me on his screen BEFORE it registers collision on my screen due to latency. If he flies completely through me, we will probably both die since my computer will probably register this action as well.
How is this a good example of being a collision martyr? Come up with a better example where it isn't 100% your fault like you say happens to you all the time.
Sorry I didnt understand.
I'm sick of the veteran players treating the new players (like myself) like trash. Your elitist attitude and your ego should go elsewhere. No wonder new subscriptions are suffering.
What about stray bombers in a formation magically warping into my airplane? Ever had that happen?
Sorry I didnt understand.
I'm sick of the veteran players treating the new players (like myself) like trash. Your elitist attitude and your ego should go elsewhere. No wonder new subscriptions are suffering.
Uhh... that's a pretty weak troll there 24 (even for you).
And you are hardly a "new" player.
How about your petty trolling, constant trouble making and 6 year old thread bumps go elsewhere instead?
or do you mean 'I am Loveable and Capable.'?
Yes exactly. I'm Loving And Caring
That may explain why every single time I end up in a co-collision I die, the other guy gets the kill and I get nothing. It works that way EVERY single time.
I do now have a high end computer and a good, fast internet connection
I could accept that in a one-way collision but I'm talking about us both hitting each other. The collision messages are there for both of us. I would think once in a while I would be the one to get the kill but that's not the case. My opponent gets it EVERY time.
But just to be clear. We both get collision messages. I die. My opponent gets credited with a kill. I never get credited with a kill... EVER.
Why am I the only one ever to die during these co-collisions? I would think that over time they'd balance at 50/50 but they don't. It's been like this since i built my new computer. Prior to that it was about 50/50.
I want to know why this is (posts from another thread on this topic). It seems those with fast computers/connections are penalized:And you've been told NO. What you see is what you get. Stop flying into other AC. :aok
And you've been told NO. What you see is what you get. Stop flying into other AC. :aok
Pictures and film not enough.
:rofl :rofl
I want to know why this is (posts from another thread on this topic). It seems those with fast computers/connections are penalized:It seems you're just bailing out before your enemy is. Or maybe he fired or you didn't?
I'm talking about mutual collisons. I'm totally fine with the way one sided collisions work.It depends on what part of his ac hit your ac.
I want to know why this is (posts from another thread on this topic). It seems those with fast computers/connections are penalized:
I'm talking about mutual collisions. I'm totally fine with the way one sided collisions work.
A solution to stop collisions would be for both aircraft to be disabled thus causing pilots to avoid headon attacks. I can understand glancing hits but some use the head on tactic too much. :mad:
Eagl,No it wont. Because the collision is determined on YOUR front end numty. You can't get much faster than that.
Your correct in what your asking. The computer that can decipher and send that signal faster than another will most certainly be penalized or awarded the collision. Speed is of the essence.
:lol
No it wont. Because the collision is determined on YOUR front end numty. You can't get much faster than that.
Correct.
Connection has zero to do with it.
bzzzt connection has everything to do with it. The closer the relative connections, the more likely both take damage proportionately. Conversely, the greater the disparity, only one may see the message and take damage. It's all about connections... the lesser variable is our human response time in trying to avoid a collision if possible/desired.
I got it I SHOULD DIE in every collision seems i do anyway wether its my fault or not. however from what i understand from all the guru's that spend their time playing this game its because, I have a latency in my protracted floppy whitch intern pulls GB from my twisted parodoqical ram and therefore creates a laguistic compromise in my bytes and cause me to lose a tail and DIE :rofl :rofl and i thought it was because someone ran into my cartoon plane...imagine that :salute
:rofl :rofl :rofl I couldnt help myself fugi everytime someone brings up a question like this out come all the computer geeks and their technical jibberish about somethin that most people dont understand in the first place. All most people know is that someone crashed into their cartoon plane, I'd be pissed to cause it has happened to me alot especially during squeeker season.The thing that makes me laugh is that when they hit you and it clearly says " pilot 1 has collided with you" and they PM you callin you a dweeb and other assorted generation whine insults. :rofl :rofl :salute
OH and leave my protracted floppy alone :rofl :rofl :rofl
Your "solution" would make ramming a viable tactic to stop an enemy aircraft. HT has refused to do that. A better solution is to avoid situations that cause collisions...ie., fly better. :aokRamming is a tactic now. I guess I must stop trying to avoid a collision for while I'm avoiding the dweeb spit is not and getting the reward.
Ramming is a tactic now. I guess I must stop trying to avoid a collision for while I'm avoiding the dweeb spit is not and getting the reward.LOL priceless.
Ramming is a tactic now. I guess I must stop trying to avoid a collision for while I'm avoiding the dweeb spit is not and getting the reward.
You only see the white text informing you your opponent has collided.
BRONK.....in the films, do BOTH collision messages not show up, or only the orange "you have collided" message?
You only see the white text informing you your opponent has collided.
To avoid Collision: Spot AC heading towards you, turn away and allow DWEEB to get on your 6, then open a channel to him and ask if he will let you go unharmed, smile as your tail is shot off and bail while shooting him with your 45. Up another AC and Repeat.lol lots to learn :aok
To avoid Collision: Spot AC heading towards you, turn away and allow DWEEB to get on your 6, then open a channel to him and ask if he will let you go unharmed, smile as your tail is shot off and bail while shooting him with your 45. Up another AC and Repeat.
It's known that certain planes are modeled to come out on top in a collision and some fly them knowing that. They will kamikaze you. It's hard to avoid those collisions in a furball. I only had one collision in four hours of fighting last night so I guess I'm learning to fly after all these years. I've learned so much from the wisdom on the forums :rolleyes:
YA......Shhhh it's a secret. :furious :furious
the spitfires are impervious to collisions, gunfire, and the laws of physics. :rolleyes:
YA......I knew it! That explains everything. You have been so helpful with the issue of collisions. You have added so much. I appreciate those that wish to help explain the physics of the game and not to just dismiss those that think it could be a problem in the program. :aok
the spitfires are impervious to collisions, gunfire, and the laws of physics. :rolleyes:
Whew glad he didn't tell him about the D3A1...... sonofa..... now I'm doing it. ;)
Whew glad he didn't tell him about the FM2...... sonofa..... now I'm doing it. ;)I promise to drink away all memory of what I have read today tonight. Happy New Year!
I knew it! That explains everything. You have been so helpful with the issue of collisions. You have added so much. I appreciate those that wish to help explain the physics of the game and not to just dismiss those that think it could be a problem in the program. :aok
Whew glad he didn't tell him about the FM2...... sonofa..... now I'm doing it. ;)
cleared....i dont see anything about an FM2...do you....oh wait...jeez